3. Incorrect signage?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic: Incorrect signage?  (Read 4087 times)

0 Members and 23 Guests are viewing this topic.

Incorrect signage?
« on: »
Hello.

Is there any mileage when signage is incorrect?

the Lidl carpark signage states 'Free Parking' and to get that you must enter your registration in store.
In order to enter your reg you need to scan your receipt first.  In order to get a receipt you need to buy something.
If you need to spend money, how can it be free parking?

For comparison the local ALdi has the same system, minus the need for the receipt


Just be clear - I haven't got a ticket, I'm just offended by the sign!

Logged

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook

Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #1 on: »
It's private land. If you own the land, you can put up a sign that says anything.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #2 on: »
Quote from: b789 on January 30, 2025, 03:57:15 pm
It's private land. If you own the land, you can put up a sign that says anything.
Possibly, but if you intend to rely on that sign to regulate parking then you need to be a bit more careful.

One of our parking experts will no doubt provide a more helpful answer.
Logged
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #3 on: »
The original question was whether there is "any mileage when signage is incorrect".

It's not quite clear to me what exactly is meant by that question. If the OP was asking if they can take any action against anyone on the basis of the signage alone (in the absence of a PCN having been issued etc.), then b789's answer would seem to be a decent succinct summary of the situation.

Whether the signage would be capable of forming a contract between the parking operator and a particular driver would be another matter, and would depend on the circumstances of the particular case.
Logged
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #4 on: »
Sorry, I'm not a "sign expert" but I do consider myself a "parking expert", at least when it comes to unregulated private parking companies. So, I shall refine my answer:

If the landowner wants to rely on the sign to enforce parking terms, they must ensure it is accurate and not misleading. The sign claims 'free parking', but requiring a purchase contradicts this and could render it unenforceable if challenged. Misleading signage won't hold up in a legal dispute.

However, my original answer still stands because, fundamentally, the owner of private land has the freedom to put up a sign with any message, as long as it doesn’t break laws such as advertising regulations, planning restrictions, or public nuisance laws. The content of the sign itself doesn’t matter unless they intend to enforce it or use it to mislead or defraud someone, in which case stricter rules apply.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Like Like x 1 View List
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #5 on: »
Quote from: unzippy on January 30, 2025, 03:39:01 pm
In order to get a receipt you need to buy something.
If you need to spend money, how can it be free parking?

Of course it's still free parking even if you have to spend money on something else.

If you buy a loaf of bread for £1 and you don't have a car, £1 is what you pay.

If you've parked up in their carpark and buy the same loaf of bread and get your parking ticket validated, you have still only paid £1 and as there was no additional charge for the parking, it is free.

If you saw an advert in PC world for a TV with a free soundbar, would you expect to be able to walk in and get the soundbar without having to spend any money?
The offer of free parking at Lidl's is no different. You have to spend money on something to entitle you to the freebie.
Logged
Like Like x 1 View List
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #6 on: »
Although the requirement to purchase something does bring up an interesting thought - if you turn up in good faith to buy a loaf of bread, as per Dave's example, but arrive to find they have run out, would the store give you a receipt to use the parking terminal, or would you essentially be faced with the choice of either buying something you didn't want vs receiving a £100 parking charge and having to fight your case with ParkingEye?
Logged
Like Like x 1 View List
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #7 on: »
The sign (contract) says that to park (for free) you "must enter your vehicle registration using the terminal in store". No mention of receipts, or how you qualify as a "customer".
If they prevent you from entering your vehicle registration because you don't have a receipt, isn't that frustration of contract or something?
Logged
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #8 on: »
I think in such situations there would be all sorts of arguments one could deploy to fight the charge, but on a purely practical level it'd be a bit of a ridiculous state of affairs if one was issued in such a circumstance and surely wouldn't be particularly good for Lidl's business.

Of course this is all hypothetical, although it is the Flame Pit.
Logged
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #9 on: »
Given what we do know, based solely on the sign, the conditions and the scenario can be consolidated as follows:

1. What the Sign States:

• The sign explicitly states that the driver must input their vehicle registration number (VRM) in a terminal inside the store to receive free parking during store trading hours.

• Outside of store trading hours, the sign allows free parking for the same 90-minute period without requiring VRM entry, presumably because the terminal is inaccessible.

2. No Mention of a Purchase Requirement:

• Since the sign does not state that a purchase is required to use the VRM terminal, the "free parking" offer appears to be unconditional—at least as per the written terms on the sign.

• If, in practice, the terminal requires a receipt to validate parking, this would contradict the sign and create ambiguity, potentially rendering the parking terms unenforceable if challenged.

3. Potential Practical Issues:

• If a driver enters the store intending to comply by entering their VRM but finds that the terminal requires a purchase receipt, they would face an unclear situation. Without prior knowledge of this hidden condition, the driver could inadvertently breach the terms.

• Similarly, if the driver is unable to use the terminal due to no purchases (e.g., items out of stock or no desire to buy anything), the driver could be unfairly penalised despite acting in good faith.

4. Equal Free Parking Outside Store Hours:

• The allowance of 90 minutes of free parking outside store hours, without any VRM entry requirement, highlights the inconsistency in enforcing the VRM entry during trading hours. If parking is offered unconditionally outside trading hours, requiring VRM input during trading hours could be seen as an unnecessary and potentially arbitrary restriction.

Conclusion:

• The sign itself does not explicitly require a purchase, so the offer of "free parking" appears valid on the face of it.

• However, if the store in practice requires a receipt to access the VRM terminal, it creates an unwritten condition that contradicts the sign, making the parking terms unclear and unenforceable.

• Lidl and ParkingEye would have to clarify this ambiguity, either by updating the sign to explicitly mention receipt validation or ensuring that VRM entry is accessible without a purchase. Clear communication is essential if the sign is intended to form a contract with the driver.





Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #10 on: »
I'm offended by people who start random threads to express their offence at signage stating "Free Parking" and then post an image of the offending sign which does not contain those words.

Also, if there is a contractual offer of the right to park in return for entering your VRM, by necessary implication the offeror promises to provide the facility to enter your VRM. I would suggest that this is not frustration (albeit both this thread and the potential issue are frustrating) as this is within the offeror's (of his agent's or principal's) control.
Logged
I am responsible for the accuracy of the information I post, not your ability to comprehend it.
Funny Funny x 2 View List
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #11 on: »
Quote from: b789 on January 30, 2025, 06:53:18 pm
Since the sign does not state that a purchase is required to use the VRM terminal, the "free parking" offer appears to be unconditional—at least as per the written terms on the sign.
But what the sign does state at the top is "Customer parking only" and as the definition of a customer when using the term as relating to a shop is:
a person who buys goods or services from a shop or business.
or:
one that purchases a commodity or service
it stands to reason that you must buy something when wishing to avail yourself of the free parking.
Logged
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #12 on: »
Quote from: andy_foster on January 30, 2025, 07:18:42 pm
I'm offended by people who start random threads to express their offence at signage stating "Free Parking" and then post an image of the offending sign which does not contain those words.

Does not contain those words?

"You must enter your vehicle registration number using the terminal in store to receive 90 minutes free parking"
Logged
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #13 on: »
At my local Lidl in Ashford (Kent, for the sake of clarity, the other Ashford is in surrey), a customer can either use a scanned receipt and enter the VRM or just enter the VRM. The signage is confusing as there's a leisure centre on the same block which allows up to 2 hours free parking if using the leisure centre by entering the VRM on the screen in reception. Lidl, which shares the same car park, allows 90 minutes. so if I go to the osteo in the leisure centre then shopping in Lidle, can I park for free for three and a half hours?

Just remember, in any later correspondence never admit to being the driver.
Logged
Bus driving since 1973. My advice, if you have a PSV licence, destroy it when you get to 65 or you'll be forever in demand.
Re: Incorrect signage?
« Reply #14 on: »
Quote from: roythebus on January 30, 2025, 08:46:15 pm
At my local Lidl in Ashford (Kent, for the sake of clarity, the other Ashford is in surrey), a customer can either use a scanned receipt and enter the VRM or just enter the VRM.

That's my point.  I guess I have no issue with them having the system (well I do actually - technically speaking the ANPR cameras are clocking the cars in and out, they know perfectly well who overstayed the 'Free Parking' time limit.  There's absolutely no need to be entering reg numbers) it's the requirement to spend money in order to enter your reg that gets up my nose.

According the staff member I spoke to about it there's a 10 min grace period, also not mentioned in the signage.  However that wasn't useful in this instance as that's not long enough for my 74 year old Dad to enter the store and check out the middle aisle delights.

Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3
« previous next »
  3. Incorrect signage?